1) Urgent, then Big, then Sente, then Reverse Sente, then Gote.
2) Did your opponent play an attaching move? is that group in atari, or has few liberties?
3) can you cut? would cutting be valueable? (are both groups alive or can easily make life?)
4) count every 16 moves. are you ahead or behind?
5) can you save that small group? would it be valueable to do so?

#4 is one i really need to work on. everyone needs to work on #1.

That is a very peculiar list. First off, the first entry doesn't make sense. If an urgent move ends in gote, the entry doesn't make much sense. Furthermore, prioritizing sente over reverse sente over gote should only be considered in the end game. You can't constantly strive to keep sente in the early and mid game, sometimes you just need to play the gote move that's too big to ignore. I think, at 6k, you don't need a checklist to verify that your opponent's stone attaches to yours, then checking to see if it's in atari. Counting every 16 moves sounds like torture. And why 16? Why not 24? Or 31? And lastly, it doesn't matter if a group is small or not. Sometimes a small group can be absolutely crucial to save, other times you're better off just dumping it. It depends on factors such as how the group interacts with the other groups on the board, or how difficult it'd be to save it. Instead, I'd write for 5 "Is this a group worth saving?".

Furthermore, if the moves are the same size, you usually prioritize gote over reverse sente
(see viewtopic.php?p=9605#p9605)

1) Is reducible to "make the biggest move" IMNSHO

I'd take a 30 point gote move over a 1 point reverse sente move any day of the week, and even a 1 point sente move if the followup was worth less than 29 points.

Even urgent and big are reducible to the net shift in overall points over time for each player, which again returns to relative point values.

I'd use araban's #5, and for #4, I'd replace it with "count every time the dust settles enough for you to have to make a strategic decision on how to progress the game as a whole". Often you end up in complicated battles that simply require playing out as each move in sequence is urgent. At the end, sometimes there's just a move that needs playing (or, at least, an area that needs playing).

I find counting is only valuable when you have 3 or 4 options for the way forward, containing different levels of risks and potential gains / losses, and you'd pick a different one if you were 10 points ahead compared to 10 points behind.

#2 Normally needs a pretty convincing reason to tenuki, so I'm not sure what the point in the list is supposed to mean. If it's a case of which response to make, doesn't that also apply to presses, crosscuts, slides, and a whole number of "typical" situations with a variety of tactical responses and strategic goals. Does #2 deserve special merit over other possible moves?

#3 is definitely very important when cutting points are left, including a decision to protect your own (which has to have approximately equal value to cutting your opponent, details notwithstanding).

I have recently made #3 my top priority (along with my favorite go proverb: "cut first, think later"), and the results look quite promising